"Hi Biff,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Surabaya, I have come across the

""way/703241496
way/219527086
way/219527065
way/703241495""

classified as 'tertiary'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, this seems to be 'residential'.

As of now correcting the data. Please suggest if it is otherwise

Thanks in advance."

"Hi Diana IRM-ED,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Surabaya, I have come across the way/678566960
classified as 'service'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, this seems to be 'residential'.

As of now correcting the data. Please suggest if it is otherwise

Thanks in advance."

"Hi Farras,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Surabaya, I have come across the way/449670153
classified as 'residential'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, this seems to be 'unclassified'.

As of now correcting the data. Please suggest if it is otherwise

Thanks in advance."

"Hi atmahadi,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Surabaya, I have come across the
""way/561187730
way/561187733""

classified as 'tertiary'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, this seems to be 'unclassified'.

As of now correcting the data. Please suggest if it is otherwise

Thanks in advance."

Hi Patrick Bous,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Aceh, I have come across way/544360616 classified as 'Residential'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, this seems to be 'Unclassified' and also there is a classification gap existing as the other way/658988920 connected to this is marked as "unclassified".

Please look into this and share your observations

Thanks in advance.

Hi dgitto,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Aceh, I have come across way/411679208
way/411679198
way/411679200
way/411679202
way/411679204
way/411679207 classified as 'Track'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, this seems to be 'Residential'. Please look into this and share your thoughts on this.

Thanks in advance.

Hi Adhitya Dido,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Aceh, I have come across the way/423186264, way/423186330, way/423186284 and way/423186259 classified as 'residential'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, this seems to be 'unclassified' and for way/462708742 and way/467849476 classified as 'unclassified', this seems to be 'residential'. Please look into this and share your thoughts on this.

Thanks in advance.

Hi SimonWalduck,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Aceh, I have come across way/472931512 classified as 'tertiary'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, this seems to be 'Unclassified'. As of now making necessary changes.
Please suggest if it is otherwise

Thanks in advance.

Hi Yudha Sidhikoro,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Aceh, I have come across way/458428650 classified as 'unclassified'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, this seems to be 'Service'. As of now making necessary changes.
Please suggest if it is otherwise

Thanks in advance.

Thanks for confirming.

Hello adiatmad,
I found many instances where residential segments are either changed to unclassified and/or new segments which are supposed to be created as residential are created as unclassified.
As these roads are leading to residential buildings, they should not be unclassified. Letting you know before making any changes to understand if there is any logic which I am missing. Please review and suggest
Here are the examples
way/538199202
way/538199122
Thanks,
barigela